Friday, November 23, 2012

The Kansas City Royals are pushing hard to contend in 2013, considering almost every option to upgrade their pitching staff. And that includes trading the best hitting prospect in baseball.
In their search for a top-of-the-rotation starter, the Royals have dangled outfielder Wil Myers, the consensus 2012 minor league player of the year, two sources told Yahoo! Sports.

This would really stir up the hot stove season if the Royals go through with this type of move.

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

So KC lost 90 games, 16 out of first place, had 29 games started last year total by guys with an ERA+ of 100 or better, their only double digit winner was Bruce Chen, their offense had an OPS+ of 96, they haven't finished higher than 3rd place since 1995, have been better than 500 just once since 1994, and they want to trade top prospects for an ace?

Philly should be on the line to KC and see just how desperate they are. They also should watch out as Toronto might just try to slip in and fleece them.

Given his track record I'm both curious and frightened to see what Moore considers a top of the rotation starter worth giving Myers up for. Somehow I get the feeling he'll target a durable innings-eater like Nolasco or Shields or Billingsley.

Philly seems an obvious match but R.A. Dickey is also a top-of-the-rotation starter.

Thinking out loud: Who are the other possible matches? You'd have to get a team that is not contending next season and that has a frontline starter who is not going to be a building block for the next few seasons. The Marlins already dumped Johnson. Does James McDonald on the Pirates fit the description? I know the Braves were shopping Hanson but he's regressed a bit.

The Royals lost 90 games last year. They need to win 20 more games before they're in contention -- 200 runs. The team OPS+ and ERA+ were both 96. The starting right fielder had an OPS+ of 81.

They don't need to be screwing around trying to get production from particular spots. They need as many runs as they can get, as cheaply as possible. They should be completely indifferent about whether they get those runs on offense, defense, or pitching.

Right now, the Royals are basically set at C, 1B, SS, 3B, LF, and DH, in the sense that they can't realistically upgrade the position on their current budget. If Lorenzo Cain is healthy, add CF to that list. That leaves RF (Francouer) and 2B (Getz) as positions that can be improved on a budget. It's just insane to let go of a young right fielder who can hit for average and power.

When's the next time the Royals are going to have a chance at a free agent outfielder as good as Myers projects to become?

Myers strikes me as one of the less sure-fire top prospects I've seen. I don't think there is much call for knocking the concept of this move. If something should go down, then evaluate that based on its own merits. But this isn't bad yet.

how secure is dayton moore's job? if he thinks he's likely to be fired at the end of the season, it would make sense that he's willing to mortgage the future of a team he won't likely be employed by, for one last chance at taking the team into contention.

I'd probably do Scherzer for Myers too if I were in Dayton Moore's position (although perhaps not as a 1-1). The Royals have to take a stride forward soon or he's history, and the thing that's really holding them back is the failure to develop their young pitchers. Their guys get hurt (Duffy, Lamb) or implode (Montgomery) or both (Melville). The guys who are likely to help in the future aren't close to helping now. They need someone who can give them 180-200 innings at the front of the rotation with legitimate chances to win every time out.

From the article:He hit .314 with 37 home runs and slugged .600 between Double-A and Triple-A, and while it would take a big spring for him to crack the Royals' opening-day roster, Kansas City expects his arrival by May at latest – if he's still with the team.

Look, the Royals have a great farm system. The everyday lineup in KC is young and should continue to improve. They need pitching. It makes a *lot* of sense for the Royals to go in big for an ace.

If you're a small market club, you do *not* trade a Wil Myers. His upside is far, far too high and his chances of getting there much too realistic to possibly justify moving him unless you're getting back a genuine ace who is youngish and still under team control at a reasonable price.

DMGM has to know this, and he's tended to his farm way too carefully to ruin the harvest now.

How about prospect swapping....Matt Harvey or Zach Wheeler for meyers???

No please. I'd rather see them move Dickey for Myers plus. Not that I want to see him traded, but there's no way that RA is part of the next great Met team (if there even is such a thing). At this point, I'm in the "move Dickey and Wright" camp, provided they can get good value coming back.

Lol. Dickey will not net you Myers, much less Myers+. Most GMs do not value Dickey as a true "front line" ace type starter, despite his 2012 season which was, admittedly, top notch. Knuckleballers are just too volatile to predict year to year, and he has no established track record (and given his age, I suspect the Mets would be better off keeping RA at a decent price).

Lol. Dickey will not net you Myers, much less Myers+. Most GMs do not value Dickey as a true "front line" ace type starter, despite his 2012 season which was, admittedly, top notch. Knuckleballers are just too volatile to predict year to year, and he has no established track record (and given his age, I suspect the Mets would be better off keeping RA at a decent price).

I'm not sure where the "most GMs do not value Dickey" knowledge comes from, but 1) check the HR/9, BB/9, and H/9-- Dickey has been pretty consistent, 2) he is cheaper than most other "front line" ace starters (however we're defining that), and 3) this is the GD Royals we're talking about here.

It remains to be seen if the bump in K rate will be sustainable, but it wasn't an ability that he only showed at one point in the season. The Mets aren't in a position for that to matter very much-- I don't think the team will be competitive in 2013 or 2014. They simply don't have the talent on-hand or the money to spend to get it. The rotation with RA looks excellent, but they won't be able to score enough runs for it to matter.

This is a joke, right? A 37 year old knuckleballer who's signed for one year for a 21 year old AAA prospect who's cost controlled for six seasons? And you want a bonus, besides?

I was thinking "deal contingent upon contract extension" and "plus" being a C+/B- pitching prospect. Dickey is certainly difficult to peg going forward, but because of that he'll probably sign for cheaper than other pitchers with his recent track record. And his track record has been excellent-- no durability issues, trending up instead of down, hard worker, throws a lot of innings, ect. I don't know who you think is available that could be had straight-up for Myers and who can be counted on to be a Royal for any longer than 3 years (I think that's about Dickey's shelf life, but who knows).

Whenever people claim that Deal X could never happen, it's worth bearing mind that the Mets got Zach Wheeler for a half-season of Carlos Beltran. GMs do strange things sometimes. I wouldn't do that deal as the Royals-- if I'm the Royals I hold onto Myers for dear life, unless someone blows me away.

Edit: The Royals, for all of their talent, don't look particularly close to contending to me. They'd be banking on Hosmer and Moustakas both taking huge steps forward after miserable seasons, young pitching emerging, and Jeff Francouer not being himself again. Also, why are people excited about Lorenzo Cain?

I wonder if this is much ado about nothing. It seems to me that, in Moore's position, I'd be willing to consider moving Myers for a #1 starter, in theory, as well. But that doesn't mean I'd be eager to do it. Probably more of a case of not wanting to close the door on a King Felix deal than anything else.

How hard is it to change the CBA rules on arb eligibility? :-) Sheesh, the Royals didn't even give him a Sept cup of coffee last year.

Myers strikes me as one of the less sure-fire top prospects I've seen.

I'm curious what this is based on. The K-rate's a little high but not scary; good BA, good walk rate, good ISO; he's still playing plenty of CF (and stealing a handful of bases) so I assume he has the speed to project as at least average in RF. His age 20 season was a bit of a disaster but he bounced back completely last year. What's the warning sign?

The Royals should not trade a position player with star potential when none of their current youngsters have (yet?) developed into stars. Most contenders have a guy on the team who, in a typical good year, could be a top-5 MVP contender. In Gordon, Butler, and Perez, they have good "co-stars" for a contender, but Perez is the only one of the three with remaining upside, I would think (although it's possibe Gordon or Butler still have a "career year" ahead of them). Hosmer and Moustakas could develop into front-line players, but Hosmer in particular was so awful last year that it casts real doubt over whether he will actually develop or remain Smoak-esque.

I'd trade Hosmer before Myers, but unless you're putting together a package for someone like Felix Hernandez or something, I'd rather see if they can have the great offense that they thought they'd get out of Hosmer, Moose, and Myers.

Other than Myers, though, I'm all for trading prospects for established starters, not only pitchers but 2B and possibly CF.

I wouldn't do that deal as the Royals-- if I'm the Royals I hold onto Myers for dear life, unless someone blows me away.

Sorry about getting on your case earlier. Dickey might even be an interesting trade target for the Royals, but putting Myers into the discussion is simply absurd. Historically, the #1-5 prospects put up something like 10 WAR while they're under control of the team. At a free agent cost of $5 million per WAR, that's about $50 million, less the cost of their salary. Call it $30 million for the sake of argument.

The Mets would be putting up one year of R.A. Dickey, a 38 year old who throws a pitch that's historically difficult to control. He's scheduled to make $5 million in 2013, the only year the Mets control. Be generous, and figure he's worth $15 million on a one year contract. So you have the Mets offering something worth about $10 million, in return for something worth two or three times that much. That's not really close enough to be interesting.

Other than Myers, though, I'm all for trading prospects for established starters, not only pitchers but 2B and possibly CF.

I would be on board with this. Aside from Myers, the Royals are starting to get to a point where the talent in the pipeline doesn't necessarily match up with the needs on the field.

If the perfect deal came around, I wouldn't even be opposed to trading Myers. But what would a deal like that even look like? How many contracts out there have $20-30 million of potential excess value? How many of those line up with a position of need for the Royals, and why would those guys even be available? I think the only way to get fair value for Myers is to play him.

That, and KC seems really reluctant to put him in the lineup, for whatever reason. It makes me suspicious that they know something that the rest of MLB hasn't figured out yet, and that they want to pump and dump him.

The only type of deal that'd make sense for Myers is a Pineda for Montero type deal. Something with Arizona could make sense, given their surplus. Bauer or Skaggs coming back, along with something else, could make sense. Maybe there's some big honking Upton/SP for Myers/X type of deal. Hellickson would make sense, as mentioned above, and maybe Price if they could get an extension with him, but that's unlikely. Parker was also mentioned and is in the ballpark. Other than that, there really aren't many good fits from both sides. Trading players like Myers is very difficult.

Be generous, and figure he's worth $15 million on a one year contract.

This is not generous. At $5 mil/WAR, Dickey was worth $23 mil last season. Plus, I think you have to assume that if you don't sign Dickey, you would make him a qualifying offer, and you would get the draft picks if you don't sign him. Myers may be too valuable to give up for Dickey, but not dramatically so. On the other hand, the Mets could offer Jon Niese for Myers, which I actually think is too much too give up from the Mets' perspective.

A proven, above-average cost-controlled major league lefthanded starter for a "prospect" who struck out 140 times in AA and AAA last year - this is the idea you're laughing at - from the perspective of the team with the "prospect"? I thought this was supposed to be a thinking fan's site.

If Met fans are good for nothing else, this thread has shown they are good for comic relief.

According to the article, trading Myers for a starter is the Royals' idea, not an idea invented by Mets fans. Perhaps you can think of another starter who might be available that is better than Dickey or Niese.

Or Vlad, would the Pirates give one of their young arms+ for Myers, or are they more concerned with finding arms (I assumed the latter).

I wondered about that, but I think they're committed to Cole and Taillon and Heredia over the long haul. If they weren't willing to deal any of them for Headley last year, I don't think they'd deal them for Myers, either.

If the Royals were willing to go with a second-tier arm? Sure, they'd better be in on that. But I'd be shocked if KC couldn't get a better offer from someone else.

Plus, the Pirates are pretty set in the OF right now with McCutchen and Marte and Snider. If they were going to deal one of their big chips, I think it'd be for a bigger need, like a top shortstop or catcher.

I happen to have driven past the Sleepy Hollow exit today -- I thought maybe I had been asleep for a few years and missed Jonathan Niese's streak of years of above average performance. But no, he's still Jon "one good year" Niese with a career high 190 innings.

Then again, I remember the halcyon days of Domonic Brown, #1 prospect.

I thought maybe I had been asleep for a few years and missed Jonathan Niese's streak of years of above average performance. But no, he's still Jon "one good year" Niese with a career high 190 innings.

His peripherals have been very consistent, but this is the first year he wasn't bitten by the BABIP fairy. A year ago, those of you who like to antagonize us were trying to claim there was something about Neise that made him especially delicious to the fairy.

Plus, the Pirates are pretty set in the OF right now with McCutchen and Marte and Snider. If they were going to deal one of their big chips, I think it'd be for a bigger need, like a top shortstop or catcher.

Yeah, that's what I figured. It's tough to align value and needs, hence the short list above.

I wouldn't trade Niese for Myers and I don't think I'm overvaluing Niese. I think people are going to start overvaluing top prospects based on how well Trout and Harper did, but Myers could just as easily be Delmon Young or Travis Snider.

I wouldn't trade Niese for Myers and I don't think I'm overvaluing Niese. I think people are going to start overvaluing top prospects based on how well Trout and Harper did, but Myers could just as easily be Delmon Young or Travis Snider.

Demon Young oWAR (career): 4.9
Jon Niese WAR (career): 3.1

Obviously defense counts, too, but the disappointing version of Myers could easily be equal to Niese so far. The optimistic projection of Myers seems clearly far beyond the optimistic projection of Niese. The only reason to imagine them equivalent is to believe you have something close to certainty about where each one will fall in their projections. If you know Myers will be toward the pessimistic end and Niese at the optimistic end, then you can make a good case for the trade. In this world, though, it doesn't work. There's a case to be made for trading Myers for an established strong but not superlative level--for someone who pitched like Niese 2012 for 3-4 years--but there's about as much uncertainty around Niese as there is around Myers, without the corresponding upside.

Obviously defense counts, too, but the disappointing version of Myers could easily be equal to Niese so far.

The pessimistic projection of Myers is a guy who put up less than 1 WAR a year. Niese so far has bettered that, plus he just had his best season, plus if you use component numbers he's a guy worth over 2.5 WAR a year.

Now if Myers succeeds, he'll be much better than that, but I think the odds of him hitting his optimistic projection are somewhat lower than the odds that Niese does.

1. He has averaged 2.33 WAR over the past 3 seasons and 2.55 WAR over the past 2 seasons (fangraphs).
2. The Mets control his rights for the next 4 years at total cost of $24 mil.
3. The Mets have a $10 mil team option in 2017 and an $11 mil team option in 2018.
4. He just turned 26.

In short, you have a cost controlled left-handed starting pitcher for the next six seasons who is at least a No. 3 starter. Assuming the $5 mil/WAR figure that was raised previously and assuming he continues to perform as he has performed (which takes into account his first full season which was a fair bit worse than his last two seasons), his contract gives the team approximately $25 mil in excess value over the next six seasons (and the vast majority of that value is over the next 3 seasons where there is less projection involved). While, there is always risk of performance degradation, there is always the chance of improvement for a 26 year old pitcher - it's not as it Niese lacks upside. And unlike Myers, there is no risk of issues in transition from the minor leagues to the major leagues. Niese is a significant asset. Maybe I do a Niese/Myers deal from the Mets perspective, and maybe I don't. But, based on the numbers, I fail to see how that kind of offer is in any way laughable.

Perhaps I am in the minority, but I think a Moose-Tacos (since they are willing to move him) for young SP (Milone probably not enough....maybe a Peacock or Gray? I am not going to pretend to fill out the details...)trade with Oakland seems like a good fit for both sides.

Perhaps I am in the minority, but I think a Moose-Tacos (since they are willing to move him) for young SP (Milone probably not enough....maybe a Peacock or Gray? I am not going to pretend to fill out the details...)trade with Oakland seems like a good fit for both sides.

Is Angelos really going to let the Orioles trade away Moustakas for anything but another Greek star?

He was 21 and also dominated AA...and A+, and A before that. He's not a PCL creation.

I agree that he's a good prospect. I just don't think he's elite. He seems like the kind of guy who will put up 120-130 OPS+ while providing ok defense in RF or LF. An above-average player, but not a superstar.

His peripherals have been very consistent, but this is the first year he wasn't bitten by the BABIP fairy. A year ago, those of you who like to antagonize us were trying to claim there was something about Neise that made him especially delicious to the fairy.

Well, his average FB is only 90-91 MPH. It wouldn't be shocking for him to get hit a little harder than average.

Well, his average FB is only 90-91 MPH. It wouldn't be shocking for him to get hit a little harder than average.

That's average or above average for a lefty, and I don't believe lefties typically have a higher BABIP than righties. Secondly if he was hittable you'd expect to see that in his strikeout rate. Hittable pitchers don't strike out 8 guys per 9. The only guys who deserve really high BABIPs are bad pitchers (the converse is not true as there are plenty of mediocre K:BB pitchers who can sustain really low BABIPs).

So where does Vance Worley fit on the Scherzer-Niese-Dickey spectrum of Royals' potential trade targets? I'm too biased to make that call. A Worley-for-Myers deal would fit the Phils if (big if) Halladay has a clean bill of health.

If Parker won't get it done, the Royals aren't seriously interested in dealing Myers.

Or perhaps, like any rational market participant, they have a price they want to get and they will look for it. Myers isn't going to land Felix or Kershaw, but the truth is that they might be able to do better than Parker.

Remember that the downside to keeping Myers is seeing how the top position prospect heading into next season develops. That's not a terrible downside at all, and frankly, I'd keep Myers if I were the Royals.

I think #77 nails it. Bob Dutton says the Royals are listening in regards to Myers, but aren't actively shopping him. I'd be pretty surprised if he gets dealt. I'd have to think they have to be overwhelmed.

The Rays do make some sense. Matt Moore would be worth looking at, but I pray they're not dazzled by Hellickson's shiny ERA.

Not by himself, but as the centerpiece of a multi-player deal? I think that's plausible.*

*Assuming that teams are willing to deal that type of pitcher to begin with, of course.

The issue isn't just "that type of pitcher". It's that type of pitcher who has multiple years remaining of team control at a reasonable value. And those types of pitchers are very rarely available. If the Royals want a pitching prospect with front of the rotation potential for Myers, I'm sure they can get that. If they want an actual front of the rotation starter under team control for multiple years at a market rate (Cliff Lee), they can probably get that. If they want an actual front of the rotation starter at an under market rate who isn't under team control for multiple years (Dickey), they can get that. What they can't get is an actual front of the rotation starter who is under team control for multiple years at an under market rate.

Nobody has raised any points that make me think the argument I posed in #62 is invalid. I think the issues people have with Niese are primarily related to the facts that (a) he lacks a top prospect pedigree and (b) the shape of his projected value is not terribly exciting.

I agree that he's a good prospect. I just don't think he's elite. He seems like the kind of guy who will put up 120-130 OPS+ while providing ok defense in RF or LF. An above-average player, but not a superstar.

That's probably his middle of the road projection, with upside for more and downside for less. Basically, a right-handed Jay Bruce.

I'm not sure I would trade Parker for Myers. Parker is young, only has a year of service time, and has already shown he can be an above average ML starter.

I think the last part is very much up for debate, and of course the injury history as noted. His FIP last year resembled his ERA, but A) That's not park adjusted, and B) even in Oakland, I think we should see at least another year of home run supression that excellent before assuming a baseline. It's an interesting fake trade.

If the Mets can extend Dickey for, say, $30MM and two more years (bringing the total tab to three years/$35MM) I think they can get that deal done with KC for Wil Myers so long as they're willing to throw in an extra $5MM or so.

Myers looks like a potential future stud, but there is always that risk that he's a Jason Kubel type as mentioned above. Dickey comes with his own set of risks. As a Mets fan I'd do this deal, I'm not sure why the non-Mets fans in this thread think Dickey-Myers is so outlandish. He's the reigning Cy Young award winner and he's been excellent for 2.5 years.

As far as Niese goes, I agree with billyshears. Niese's xFIP over the last three years has been 3.80, 3.28 and 3.64. It's not as if he has just burst onto the scene. He probably has a floor as a 2.5 to 3 WAR pitcher, and he's got a chance to someday exceed that. I probably don't take Niese for Myers if I am KC, but it's not preposterous.

Nobody has raised any points that make me think the argument I posed in #62 is invalid.

I think that your estimate of Niese's projected future value is excessively optimistic. In particular, I don't see him as having much (if any) remaining upside potential to balance out the downside risk of assuming positive contributions from a pitcher in every year of a contract of that length.

If the Mets can extend Dickey for, say, $30MM and two more years (bringing the total tab to three years/$35MM) I think they can get that deal done with KC for Wil Myers so long as they're willing to throw in an extra $5MM or so.

I think extending Dickey to turn around and deal him won't happen. As I mentioned above, making a deal (not necessarily for Myers) that's contingent upon Dickey agreeing to an extension I could see happening, and it seems like that's the only way the Mets are going to get value for him. If they deal him right now, with no extension, he's a bargain for 2013, but I can't see anyone giving up much for a one-year rental, unless they're really confident on Dickey's asking price and willingness to stay with his new team.

He's also been worth between 9.4 (B-R) and 13.7 (Fangraphs) WAR over the last five years, at a cost of $9,059,166. Using the lower of the two WAR figures and billy's value of $5M per marginal win, that's a total surplus value of just under $38M to date, with one of his six original years of team control still remaining.

If Myers becomes a Bruce-like player, trading him for Niese would be a bad idea, according to the numbers.

I think that your estimate of Niese's projected future value is excessively optimistic.

Um, how? I'm taking the average of his last three seasons to get a 2.33 WAR/season figure. That both overweights his 1.9 WAR rookie season and completely ignores any upside a pitcher who just finished his age 25 season might have. At 2.33 WAR/season, even if you ignore the the last 2 team options in the contract, Niese would return approximately $23 mil in excess value over 4 years, and $47 mil in total value over 4 years.

In particular, I don't see him as having much (if any) remaining upside potential to balance out the downside risk of assuming positive contributions from a pitcher in every year of a contract of that length.

I've assumed away all upside in my calculations. As far as downside risk, I grant that I'm assuming health and no performance degradation beneath a baseline that has been set artificially low. I think that is fair given that there are no red flags on either end. The only downside risk is inherent in Niese being a pitcher, and if the Royals don't want to take those risks, they shouldn't trade hitting for pitching.

Using the lower of the two WAR figures and billy's value of $5M per marginal win, that's a total surplus value of just under $38M to date, with one of his six original years of team control still remaining

I took the $5 mil/win figure from another poster. I also don't know how long that figure has applied - you can't really use it retrospectively.

I also don't know how long that figure has applied - you can't really use it retrospectively.

I think it's fair to use that figure here, since we're talking about a hypothetical future in which Myers develops into a Bruce-like player during a modern context.

Um, how? I'm taking the average of his last three seasons to get a 2.33 WAR/season figure.

That figure doesn't account for the chance of an injury at some point in the next six years. Also, the distribution of Niese's value across such a long time frame decreases the potential impact of his acquisition - three two-WAR seasons aren't worth as much as one six-WAR season.

completely ignores any upside a pitcher who just finished his age 25 season might have

I don't see Niese as having any significant additional upside. What aspect of his game do believe that he could improve in order to account for this uptick in performance? He doesn't seem to have much physical projection left.

I don't see Niese as having any significant additional upside. What aspect of his game do believe that he could improve in order to account for this uptick in performance? He doesn't seem to have much physical projection left.

He's dropped his walk rate each of the last 2 years, from 3.21 per 9 to 2.52 per 9 to 2.32 per 9. So as a Met fanboy I could see convincing myself he could maybe cut the walk rate even more and become an elite control pitcher.

I feel like Myers for Niese very well could turn out to be a fair trade, or one that favors Niese, but also that if you have a prospect like Myers you'd hope to get something more than Niese for him, if that makes any sense.

I think it's fair to use that figure here, since we're talking about a hypothetical future in which Myers develops into a Bruce-like player during a modern context.

But you can't use Bruce's past salaries as a baseline for Myers' future excess value because those salaries were determined in a different environment. If Myers performs exactly like Bruce over his first 4 full seasons, he will likely be paid more than Bruce was over his first 4 seasons, giving him less excess value.

That figure doesn't account for the chance of an injury at some point in the next six years. Also, the distribution of Niese's value across such a long time frame decreases the potential impact of his acquisition - three two-WAR seasons aren't worth as much as one six-WAR season.

Between Niese and Myers, Myers has been more significantly impacted by injury over the past few seasons than Niese. It's not as if there are specific concerns with Niese, and it's not as if Myers has no risk of injury in the next six seasons. Your point is a general one that pitchers are at more significant long term risk for injury and performance degradation than hitters. I agree with that, but it seems to be the Royals idea to trade hitting for pitching.

I don't see Niese as having any significant additional upside. What aspect of his game do believe that he could improve in order to account for this uptick in performance? He doesn't seem to have much physical projection left.

Well, he might not start throwing 95 mph, but I see no reason why he couldn't improve his control, refine his pitches, increase his stamina, learn how to better approach hitters, etc.